Prop. 30 money not just for schools

County law enforcement officials tasked with housing and supervising many more lower-level criminals said they were relieved last week when Proposition 30, which guarantees public safety funding statewide, eked out a victory.

But those same officials remain concerned about whether future funding will be adequate to make realignment — Gov. Jerry Brown’s plan that shifts responsibility for certain offenders from the state to the counties — work properly.

Realignment has been a state law for a year.

“We breathed a little bit of a sigh of relief,” said county Probation Chief Mack Jenkins.

His department is now responsible for monitoring more than 2,000 people who served prison time for nonviolent, nonserious crimes.

Before realignment, those offenders would have been under state supervision. Most sex offenders released from prison after serving their sentences will continue to be monitored by the state.

“It was a big step in the right direction for us,” said Sheriff Bill Gore, whose department now handles offenders sentenced to years in county jail instead of state prison.

Even though Proposition 30 is supposed to ensure local governments receive state funding to cover the responsibilities the state shifted to the counties, questions remain as to how much money will be provided and how much is enough to keep the public safe.

“I don’t think any of us know what the full impact will be,” Gore said.

Before last week’s election, much attention was paid to the roughly $6 billion Proposition 30 would raise through temporary tax increases, the bulk of which will go to schools and the rest into the state’s general fund. But the measure also guarantees annual funding for the counties, some of which have struggled to lock up or supervise the additional offenders.

“I don’t personally use the word ‘guarantee,’ ” said Jenkins, chairman of the executive committee that oversees the local realignment plan. “It’s now more difficult for the Legislature to take away money that would be used to fund realignment.”

The initiative raises income taxes for high-income taxpayers for seven years and sales taxes for everyone for four years. It passed with 54 percent support statewide.

A majority of voters in San Diego County rejected the initiative. Support here reached just under 46 percent.

“I thought it could have gone either way,” Gore said of the measure’s chances. “It’s difficult anytime you’re asking people to pay more taxes.”

Gore credited the governor for promoting the measure effectively.

San Diego County is to receive $59 million in the current fiscal year to fund realignment, and an estimated $70 million in fiscal 2013-2014.

Jenkins and Gore, along with officials from other local agencies, said they will continue to evaluate whether those amounts are adequate to meet the county’s needs.

The Probation Department continues to fill positions to meet the demands of realignment, Jenkins said. So far, the department has filled 82 positions — sworn officers and support staff — and expects to fill another 26 by January.

He said the department operates at about one probation officer to 50 offenders, which was his original target ratio. That’s noteworthy, given that the county received about 35 percent more offenders — roughly 2,700 — in the first year of realignment than was projected.